Search

• The paper examines the significance of distributive justice in the discourses of people resisting wind energy in the Isthmus of Tehuantepec, Mexico. • Activists use health and environmental concerns as frames to avoid social rejection and legitimise other more subtle distributive concerns. • Community norms and power asymmetries play a significant role in the construction of framing mechanisms to resist wind farms. • Is critical to consider reasons for framing mechanisms to advance social and environmental justice. Activists, scholars, and policymakers worldwide have increasingly recognised the intrinsic linkages between energy transitions and justice issues. However, little research exists on how groups affected by renewable energy siting interpret and mobilise justice narratives to legitimise their actions and question development plans. Building on the notion of 'framing' in social movement theory, this study addresses this gap by examininig the discourses adopted by people resisting wind energy developments in the Isthmus of Tehuantepec, Mexico. The study relies on 64 interviews and participant observation. The findings indicate that anti-wind activists used health and environmental concerns instrumentally: as a framing device to avoid social rejection and legitimise other, subtler distributive concerns about the uneven allocation of economic benefits such as tenancy payments. Although this framing was counterproductive and left their concerns unaddressed, activists adopted this strategy because of community norms and practises that stigmatise the explicit discussion of economic inequalities and their fear of challenging existing power structures. This paper therefore highlights the social mechanisms through which energy transitions reproduce economic inequalities. As a policy recommendation, it is critical to consider how inequalities are framed and the underlying reasons for these interpretive schemes to advance socially just net-zero scenarios. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Summary Do informal initiatives share a capitalist spirit of entrepreneurship? This article attempts to answer this question, using a “popular economy” analytical framework and focusing on the case of Chile. First, we present the context of the research, namely the economic and political evolutions in Chile since the 1970s and their effects on the popular economy. Then, we seek to answer the original question, relying on in-depth case studies of so-called “popular economy organizations”. Our research shows that their socio-economic logics significantly differ from those of the traditional capitalist firm. Our observations also suggest important differences between current and older initiatives. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Community-based energy systems are gaining traction among policymakers and practitioners as promising models for implementing a low-carbon energy transition. As a result, there has been a proliferation of concepts in the scientific literature, such as community energy, energy communities, community solar, and community wind. However, what scholars mean by "community" in these contexts is often unclear and inconsistent. This paper provides further conceptual clarity in the field by analyzing how the term of community is conceptualized in the scholarly literature on energy systems, through a systematic review of 405 articles. We combine an author keyword network analysis of this corpus with an in-depth analysis of 183 definitions extracted from these articles and systematically coded across three dimensions: meanings, activities and objectives of communities. Our findings show that the meanings attached to the notion of community and the alleged objectives pursued by communities vary substantially across concepts and over time. In particular, there has been a shift away from a notion of community understood as a process that emphasizes participatory aspects toward a notion of community primarily referring to a place. Furthermore, there is a growing focus on communities' economic objectives rather than their social or political goals. These findings suggest a weakening of scholars' attention to "transformative" notions of community emphasizing collective and grassroots processes of participation in energy transitions, to the benefit of "instrumental" notions. This trend runs the risk of placing the sole emphasis on the market value of communities, thereby diluting their distinctiveness from more commercial actors. • Paper provides conceptual clarity around the notion of community in energy systems. • Systematic review of 405 articles and in-depth analysis of 183 definitions. • Shift away from a notion of community as a process toward community as a place. • Growing focus on communities' economic rather than social or political objectives. • Weakening of scholars' attention to collective participation in energy transitions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• Indigenous worldviews have much to offer regarding the sustainability debate. • Indigenous and modernist visions of sustainability in the energy transition are analyzed. • Different conceptualizations of sustainability must be recognized and integrated to ensure an inclusive and just energy transition. • "Pluriversal technologies" are needed for a fair and sustainable ecological transition. Little research exists on how alternative understandings of sustainability and societal well-being, such as those developed by marginalized Indigenous populations, can enrich and possibly challenge dominant visions of sustainability anchored in Western discourses on sustainable development and ecological modernization. This paper addresses this research gap in the context of the transition towards low-carbon energy sources by addressing the following question: how do Indigenous worldviews contrast with modernist visions of sustainability in the context of the energy transition? To do so, it first builds a conceptual framework contrasting modernist and Indigenous sustainability worldviews. Second, it applies this framework to the case of wind energy developments within the territory of three Zapotec communities located in southern Mexico, with the discussion relying on 103 interviews with key stakeholders, six focus groups and participant observation. Results show that the Zapotec sustainability worldview contrasts strikingly with wind developers' modernist propositions, which tend to reproduce the region's past colonial arrangements in terms of cultural domination, non-recognition of Indigenous identities and disrespect for local customs. This contrast has led to many conflicts and misunderstandings around wind energy projects. The paper concludes that different conceptualizations of sustainability must be recognized to ensure an inclusive and just energy transition, and advances the concept of "pluriversal technologies" to emphasize the need for technologies that embrace ontological and epistemological diversity by being co-designed, co-produced and co-owned by the inhabitants of the socio-cultural territory in which they are embedded. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The circular economy (CE) concept is much-heralded among policy-makers, scholars and industry professionals as an accelerated pathway towards sustainability. This move away from the dominant linear system where products are discarded at the end of product lifecycle is deemed necessary since it is the main cause of an accelerated resource consumption. Business models are considered as a key enabler for the shift from a linear to a CE. However, research on circular business models has mainly focused on circular approaches adopted by incumbent firms, while the contributions of newly established firms (the authors call these 'circular start-ups') have been largely overlooked. This article scrutinises the business models of circular start-ups and how they may differ from those of incumbent firms embracing CE. For this, it analyses the circular business model strategies and innovations adopted by circular start-ups, relying on a novel data sample of 128 circular start-ups identified in three major CE ecosystems in Europe: the Randstad region in the Netherlands, Berlin and London. Based on this data, a novel typology of circular start-ups is proposed, distinguishing between five circular start-up archetypes: design-based, waste-based, platform-based, service-based and nature-based start-ups. The results also show that circular start-ups tend to embrace strategies corresponding to higher levels of circularity than those of incumbents. This preliminarily suggests that circular start-ups can indeed make major contributions to transitioning towards CE. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]